inspired

I’m imagining him switching his VP pick to be the dead worm. Do I still need to read the article?

This is an interesting question but I don’t think it is restricted to green. Isn’t the same true of purple, blue and red? I’m not talking about just reddish like human hair or a red panda but truly bright red like a cardinal. I would imagine it has something to do with our evolutionary history. Complete speculation here but laced with a few facts I picked up. I hear the common ancestor of mammals emerged around the time the dinosaurs became extinct and was basically a tiny rodent like a shrew. I wonder if as a small animal that can’t fly or swim it had to hide a lot and basically just came in shades of brown. So maybe any genes for other colors were lost before that common mammalian ancestor emerged and although mammals have lots of patterns they don’t have many colors.

Best I’ve got is sloths. And they’re only green because algae grows on them. And I know it sounds like cheating because they aren’t intrinsically green but before you completely discount it there are animals that wouldn’t be the color they are in a different environment. For instance, flamingos are only pink because of the seafood they eat. If fed a different diet they can be almost white.

The app is Covenant Eyes. https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/11/mike-johnson-republican-speaker-interview-covenant-eyes.html

It gives you a blurred view of the porn the other person is viewing in a near-realtime feed https://www.covenanteyes.com/how-it-works/#activity-feed

It is exactly as bad as it sounds unless they choose to claim to not be using this feature and we choose to believe them.

Yes. (See what I did there?)

He won’t seek consent for either and he’s already drafting a bill that that look you’re making… yeah, that look… is implied consent.

This man looks like he’s always about to kiss you full on the mouth but you know what he really wants to do is make a jacket out of your skin. 0 stars.

I don’t know much about politics but given the situation it sounds to me like he’s just hoping to get someone with a weaker hand into that already extremely tenuous position. Democrats shouldn’t be fooled thinking “but they’re more reasonable”. That person will automatically have a weaker position than McCarthy just because they are the second choice so it won’t matter much who the speaker is just the fact that they have zero room to maneuver. What might make it worthwhile despite this? I wonder whether Democrats can extract some binding commitments like non-reversible rule changes that survive at least for the session in order to secure their votes to oust McCarthy.

Pog mo thoin! I only remember the rude stuff. Literally read a bumper sticker like one time and it never left after over 20 years.

The obsolete skills they are learning are “prompt engineer”.

I like some of the other suggestions better than this but if you’ve already tried communicating about it and other things haven’t worked, I wonder if for some cases you could convince him to take a video or a picture. Like, if it’s a cool thing he wants you to see instead of interrupting you record it and share it when you’re available instead of right now, interrupting you. Again, I think the other proposals are better but I wonder… if you’re right about the motivation at least sometimes being just wanting to share something it might be worth attempting.

I’m genuinely curious what you think democrats could do legally that they aren’t. I understand that many underestimated Trumps chances and true danger in 2015-2016 but what is this principled resistance that isn’t happening?